Add a new comment

Why are there two separate pages for Felis silvestris and Felis catus? The two names refer to the same species; if I recall the ICZN correctly, names based on domesticated type specimens, even if older, are treated as synonyms of names based on type specimens of the same taxon of natural wild origin. On this basis, Felis catus should be merged into Felis silvestris. I see the Felis silvestris page already has a few domesticated cats in its images section.

None of these objects has anything other than a default 2.5 star rating. Really? I hid the Ecomare object. I welcome any brief summary that covers both the good and the bad -- and is well written and well referenced.

The Wikipedia article and the Smithsonian article are very different. In my view they both communicate important information, but the WP article is the more biased one. Cats are both "valued by humans" and "among the most ecologically damaging introduced animals worldwide". This later point is completely missing from the WP article, but the value. The ideal article in my view would start with the SI article and add some of the human value stuff from WP.

@Cyndy Parr: For very popular and emotive topics such as this, the wikipedia summary is normally a very good text source for a neutral point of view. It's only for less visited pages where wikipedia can be (highly) biased.

@петя спасова: We don't create pages for new taxa directly on EOL. The new name would have to come in from one of our content partners. The easiest way to do it independently, is to create a page for the taxon on Wikipedia. If you do this, make sure the page has a properly formatted Taxobox, so it will get included in our Wikipedia harvest. Alternatively, I can also create the page for you through our Rapid Response LifeDesk. To do this, I would need the taxon name and a reference for the name. This could be the reference for the original description or any other scientific paper that provides information about the taxon.

@Hossein Rajaei Sh.: Those will be automatically added based on your taxonomy tags. In these cases, be sure to also add the genus tag, e.g., taxonomy:genus=Lithostege, so we have a hierarchy that connects the new species to the genus. If you omit the genus tag, we will create a page for the new species, but there will be no hierarchy shown in the classification browser of the species page.

@Hossein Rajaei Sh.: Yes, the cc-by license is great, and it looks like all of your images have taxonomy tags and are posted to the EOL group. They should get imported with our next harvest which will probably happen tonight. They will show up in the Lithostege image collection and on each of the species pages tomorrow or Sunday.

@Hossein Rajaei Sh.: I don't know if yours were in the harvest, but a while ago Cyndy posted the following on "EOL Discussion Group": Hey folks -- new feature! You can type a person's name into the search box and get results where that person gets attribution for a multimedia or text object. Finally you can find all of your own stuff! Try it!

Dear Curators, I uploaded new photos in Flicker, 3 days ago, label them with species name, and linked them to the EOL group, however I cannot see them in EOL to connect them into the target taxa. How I can link them in EOL? How many days take time the photos to be harvested by EOL from Flicker? Do I get any message when the new photos are in EOL? Thanks in advance for your reply. Hossein